New trial OKd for man who didn't ask about victims

COURTS

Published 4:00 am, Wednesday, March 21, 2012

A Redwood City man convicted of manslaughter for a car crash that killed an 8-year-old girl and injured her sister is entitled to a new trial because the prosecution violated his right to remain silent by telling jurors he never asked about the girls' condition, a state appeals court has ruled.

Richard Tom was sentenced to seven years in prison for the February 2007 accident at a Redwood City intersection. His Mercedes struck a Nissan driven by Loraine Wong, who was turning left onto Woodside Road after stopping at a stop sign. Wong's daughter, Sydney Ng, was killed, and another daughter, 10-year-old Kendall Ng, was seriously injured.

There was no stop sign on Woodside, and Tom's lawyer argued that he had the right-of-way. But prosecutors said Tom was at fault because he was driving at least 67 mph, according to a prosecution investigator, on a road with a 35 mph speed limit. A defense investigator calculated his speed at 49 to 52 mph.

Tom, convicted of manslaughter with gross negligence, was sentenced to prison in April 2009 and also ordered to pay $147,000 in restitution to his victims.

President Trump addresses nation after mass shooting at Florida SchoolWhite House

During his jury trial, the prosecution told the jury that Tom, speaking to police after the crash, never asked about the occupants of the other car. The omission displayed a "particularly offensive" lack of regret or curiosity that showed he knew he was wrong, the prosecutor told the jury.

In its ruling Monday overturning the convictions, the First District Court of Appeal said the conversations took place while Tom was effectively under arrest - police refused to let him go home while questioning him for an hour at the scene, then continued to speak to him while driving to the police station. He therefore had the right to remain silent, and the evidence of his silence should not have been used against him, the court said.

In an "emotionally charged" case with competing versions of the cause of the crash, the evidence was "highly prejudicial" and may have influenced the verdict, said Justice Martin Jenkins in the 3-0 decision.